Correspondence between the Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised and eating disorder diagnosis: Examining the current cut-off for clinically significant eating disorder symptoms.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM Diabetic Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-13 DOI:10.1111/dme.70022
Ashley A Moskovich, Caitrin Murphy, Samantha Schram, Francesca Scheiber, Rhonda M Merwin
{"title":"Correspondence between the Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised and eating disorder diagnosis: Examining the current cut-off for clinically significant eating disorder symptoms.","authors":"Ashley A Moskovich, Caitrin Murphy, Samantha Schram, Francesca Scheiber, Rhonda M Merwin","doi":"10.1111/dme.70022","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Eating disorders (EDs) are associated with severe health complications and early death in individuals with type 1 diabetes, making the accurate detection of EDs crucial so that treatment can be initiated. The Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) is commonly used to identify individuals with type 1 diabetes with a probable ED, with scores ≥20 recommended as a clinical cut-off. However, the correspondence between a score ≥20 and an ED diagnosis has yet to be examined. This study examines the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the DEPS-R ≥20 for detecting EDs in a sample of adults with type 1 diabetes participating in a study of eating and weight concerns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Adults with type 1 diabetes (N = 83) completed the DEPS-R and a structured diagnostic ED interview (Eating Disorder Examination [EDE]). Each participant's EDE and DEPS-R scores were dichotomized (EDE: 1 = ED diagnosis, 0 = otherwise; DEPS-R: 1 = DEPS-R ≥20, 0 = otherwise) and DEPS-R ≥20 accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying EDs were calculated. A logistic regression was used to determine whether there was a significant association between the dichotomized EDE and DEPS-R scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A DEPS-R ≥20 accurately detected the presence or absence of an ED in 81.8% of the cases, with a sensitivity of 76.7% and a specificity of 88.2%. The logistic regression exhibited a significant association between the EDE and DEPS-R binary variables (coefficient estimate = 3.2, 95% CI [2.0, 4.6]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>While the majority of individuals with an ED were identified using DEPS-R ≥20, a subset failed to be detected. Clinicians should keep this in mind when using the DEPS-R and may consider additional screening methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":11251,"journal":{"name":"Diabetic Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e70022"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diabetic Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/dme.70022","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: Eating disorders (EDs) are associated with severe health complications and early death in individuals with type 1 diabetes, making the accurate detection of EDs crucial so that treatment can be initiated. The Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) is commonly used to identify individuals with type 1 diabetes with a probable ED, with scores ≥20 recommended as a clinical cut-off. However, the correspondence between a score ≥20 and an ED diagnosis has yet to be examined. This study examines the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the DEPS-R ≥20 for detecting EDs in a sample of adults with type 1 diabetes participating in a study of eating and weight concerns.

Methods: Adults with type 1 diabetes (N = 83) completed the DEPS-R and a structured diagnostic ED interview (Eating Disorder Examination [EDE]). Each participant's EDE and DEPS-R scores were dichotomized (EDE: 1 = ED diagnosis, 0 = otherwise; DEPS-R: 1 = DEPS-R ≥20, 0 = otherwise) and DEPS-R ≥20 accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for identifying EDs were calculated. A logistic regression was used to determine whether there was a significant association between the dichotomized EDE and DEPS-R scores.

Results: A DEPS-R ≥20 accurately detected the presence or absence of an ED in 81.8% of the cases, with a sensitivity of 76.7% and a specificity of 88.2%. The logistic regression exhibited a significant association between the EDE and DEPS-R binary variables (coefficient estimate = 3.2, 95% CI [2.0, 4.6]).

Conclusions: While the majority of individuals with an ED were identified using DEPS-R ≥20, a subset failed to be detected. Clinicians should keep this in mind when using the DEPS-R and may consider additional screening methods.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diabetic Medicine
Diabetic Medicine 医学-内分泌学与代谢
CiteScore
7.20
自引率
5.70%
发文量
229
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Diabetic Medicine, the official journal of Diabetes UK, is published monthly simultaneously, in print and online editions. The journal publishes a range of key information on all clinical aspects of diabetes mellitus, ranging from human genetic studies through clinical physiology and trials to diabetes epidemiology. We do not publish original animal or cell culture studies unless they are part of a study of clinical diabetes involving humans. Categories of publication include research articles, reviews, editorials, commentaries, and correspondence. All material is peer-reviewed. We aim to disseminate knowledge about diabetes research with the goal of improving the management of people with diabetes. The journal therefore seeks to provide a forum for the exchange of ideas between clinicians and researchers worldwide. Topics covered are of importance to all healthcare professionals working with people with diabetes, whether in primary care or specialist services. Surplus generated from the sale of Diabetic Medicine is used by Diabetes UK to know diabetes better and fight diabetes more effectively on behalf of all people affected by and at risk of diabetes as well as their families and carers.”
期刊最新文献
Correspondence between the Diabetes Eating Problems Survey-Revised and eating disorder diagnosis: Examining the current cut-off for clinically significant eating disorder symptoms. LncRNA CASC2 mediates SOCS6 mRNA stabilization via U2AF2 recruitment to modulate macrophage polarisation in diabetic retinopathy. Shortcut to the needle in the haystack? Screening for maturity onset diabetes of the young in a population of women with gestational diabetes. CODIFI2: Randomised controlled trial to compare clinical and cost-effectiveness of swabs versus tissue sampling to inform management of infected diabetic foot ulcers. Marked improvement in HbA1c following introduction of biosimilar insulin to treatment regimen of children and youth with type 1 diabetes in Mali: A randomised controlled trial.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1